ArticleHealthcare policy = Politiques de sante2011
Prioritizing information for quality improvement using resident assessment instrument data: experiences in one canadian province.
Article in Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pain and quality of life in nursing home residents with dementia after admission - a longitudinal study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- The uptake and use of a minimum data set (MDS) for older people living and dying in care homes: a realist review.BMC geriatrics · 2022Article
- Optimizing the InterRAI Assessment Tool in Care Planning Processes for Long-Term Residents: A Scoping Review.Clinical nursing research · 2022Article
- Adaptation and Feasibility of the interRAI Family Carer Needs Assessment in a Pediatric Setting.Health services insights · 2020Article
- A Patient-Based Needs Assessment for Living Well with Parkinson Disease: Implementation via Nominal Group Technique.Parkinson's disease · 2013Article
- Data for improvement and clinical excellence: protocol for an audit with feedback intervention in home care and supportive living.Implementation science : IS · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo elicit priority rankings of indicators of quality of care among providers and decision-makers in continuing care in Alberta, Canada.
methodsWe used modified nominal group technique to elicit priorities and criteria for prioritization among the quality indicators and resident/client assessment protocols developed by the interRAI consortium for use in long-term care and home care.
resultsThe top-ranked items from the long-term care assessment data were pressure ulcers, pain and incontinence. The top-ranked items from the home care data were pain, falls and proportion of clients at high risk for residential placement. Participants considered a variety of issues in deciding how to rank the indicators. IMPLICATIONS: This work reflects the beginning of a process to better understand how providers and policy makers can work together to assess priorities for quality improvement within continuing care.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.